Branville McCartney and his Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party is not ready to govern The Bahamas

DNA not ready to govern

By Kevin Evans

I would like to comment on the ongoing saga surrounding the leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) and Member of Parliament for Bamboo Town, Branville McCartney.  While I commend the Bamboo Town MP for chiding his parliamentary colleagues for not disclosing their financial assets to the Public Disclosure Commission for the years 2009 and 2010, I take strong exception to him calling Opposition Leader Perry Christie a wimp and Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham a bully.

Both Ingraham and Christie have been in the House of Assembly since 1977.  At that time McCartney was probably just in primary school.  Ingraham and Christie have more than 68 years of combined experience in our parliamentary system.  Branville McCartney, on the other hand, has been in Parliament for only four-and-a-half years.  He served in Ingraham's Cabinet as minister of state for immigration.  He resigned from the Cabinet in early 2010 and he severed ties with the Free National Movement (FNM) earlier this year.

After McCartney left the FNM, he founded the DNA party.  The sudden formation of the DNA after McCartney's exodus from the governing party might very well be an indication that the Bamboo Town MP was planning all along to start his own political party; perhaps as early as 2010.

Remember, in early 2010 McCartney told a Nassau Guardian reporter that he had no intention of resigning from the FNM.  He also told the same reporter that he believed that the FNM was the best party for the country at that time.  So why the sudden change and what's this all about?

McCartney’s ambition

When he was introduced to the constituents of Bamboo Town as the FNM's standard bearer in 2007, or thereabouts, McCartney probably already had ambitions of becoming prime minister after only completing his first term as MP.  Never mind the senior FNM MPs who have faithfully toed the party line for years.  I never heard of Branville McCartney before 2007.  In fact, before 2007 I had never seen him before.  Ingraham ran him in a constituency that has been considered a safe seat for the FNM.  Had it not been for Ingraham, McCartney would not have been in the position he is in today.  Had McCartney ran as an independent candidate in 2007, he would have lost his election deposit.  The FNM has made him, politically speaking, what he is today.

Perhaps McCartney, in calling the prime minister a bully, was simply doing what all opposition parties are expected to do: Oppose the sitting government.  Or maybe the Bamboo Town MP was attempting to gain much-needed publicity.  As the saying goes: All publicity is good publicity.  When McCartney and the DNA came out of the blocks, they had momentum.  The party, however, has lost that momentum during the past few months. The DNA is losing its mojo and appeal.  This is why McCartney has fought hard to stay in the limelight.  Perhaps this can also explain why the Bamboo Town MP has sought to oppose the FNM government on almost every position it holds.  McCartney at times appears to be opposing the Ingraham administration just for the sake of opposing.

Is the public losing affection for McCartney?

Be that as it may, it is crucial that the DNA make the newspaper headlines every week if it wants to remain relevant to The Bahamian people.  The party simply does not have the clout of either the Progressive Liberal Party or the Free National Movement.  I believe that it was the prominent American journalist Margaret Carlson who once said that attention is a depreciating asset.  McCartney and his DNA party would do well to heed this warning.  Bahamians are always looking for the next new thing.  That is why so many Bahamians were euphoric over the initial unveiling of the DNA party.  But it now appears as if all the excitement has cooled down.

McCartney is obviously a very confident man.  He really believes that the Bahamian electorate will support him and his party in 2012.  There's a very thin line between confidence and arrogance, however.  That McCartney and his cadre of inexperienced DNA candidates would even dare to challenge the two most important political parties in Bahamian history tells me that they are biting off more than they can chew.  McCartney is asking The Bahamian electorate to entrust the nation to him and his team of candidates who have little to no experience at running a government.

I think that it would be more prudent for Bahamians to stick with either the FNM or the PLP.  Both of these parties have worked hard to build this nation since majority rule.  Besides, at least we know what we are getting in Ingraham and Christie.

McCartney hasn't even served out his first term as MP, yet he wants to be prime minister of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas.  Ingraham and Christie had been members of Parliament for many years before they became prime minister.  In fact, Christie had served an astounding 25 years before he became prime minister in 2002; Ingraham had served 15 years before he became this nation's chief executive in 1992; and Sir Lynden (Pindling) had served over 10 years before he became premier in 1967.  Furthermore, Ingraham was elected to his position as party leader during the FNM's convention in 2005.  On the other hand, the DNA has not yet held a convention.  In my humble opinion, the Bamboo Town MP is just too inexperienced for such an important position.

DNA government would harm country

I am afraid that if the DNA wins the 2012 general election, the party might very well end up running this country aground.  With all due respect to McCartney and the DNA, I don't believe that they are ready to govern The Bahamas.

Being a successful business person does not mean you are ready to sit around the cabinet table and make decisions that will impact the lives of over 330,000 Bahamians.  Managing a grocery store or a laundromat is way different from managing a country.

Handling the finances of a law firm is not the same as handling the finances of a nation.

Right now the DNA candidates are way out of their league.  The candidates are way in over their heads, with all due respect to them.  Maybe it would be best if the DNA candidates all get involved with local government.

They could gain much valuable experience at the local government level before attempting to get into the big leagues.

Oct 21, 2011

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

Branville McCartney - the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) leader is risking his political career

Third party support

thenassauguardian editorial



Since the resignation of Bamboo Town MP Branville McCartney from the Free National Movement (FNM), the national airwaves have been dominated by talk of a third political party to challenge the FNM and Progressive Liberal Party (PLP).

The last major politician to try the third party route was former PLP deputy leader Dr. Bernard Nottage in 2002 when his Coalition for Democratic Reform (CDR) took on the two major parties. Dr. Nottage’s party failed and he lost his seat. CDR candidates were crushed as non-contenders at the polls.

At the time Bahamians were upset with the FNM, which was fractured and falling apart. They chose to go with a Perry Christie. He was a part of a major political force and he was also a new face to leadership. Christie ran as a “new PLP”, seeking to break with the somewhat tarnished legacy of the defeated old PLP.

At that 2002 election there was something new that was still a part of the mainstream for Bahamians to choose. Dr. Nottage could not compete with that.

Almost ten years later, a young, attractive and charismatic politician (McCartney) is trying the same thing with his Democratic National Alliance (DNA). He is not as politically accomplished as Dr. Nottage was at the time he led the CDR to defeat. However, McCartney may have an advantage.

At this general election, neither political party has anything new to offer at the leadership level. FNM leader Hubert Ingraham and PLP leader Perry Christie both entered the House of Assembly in 1977. Both men are known. Neither man can claim to be new. Neither man can suggest he can offer something he has not already offered during his long political career.

At this election it could be argued that a message could be presented, stating that Ingraham and Christie, and the FNM and the PLP, are the same thing and a new direction is needed for the country. In recent years there have been annual murder records; the down economy has persisted; and the Bahamian education system is doing poorly.

Though this environment exists, it is unclear if Bahamians will break with the PLP/FNM duopoly.

The key for any third party movement would be to determine if dissatisfaction with the parties could be harnessed into votes. If that dissatisfaction cannot be, starting a third party will only waste money.

Ultimately, Bahamians will have to decide if they will accept others at the national table of decision making or if they think only card carrying PLPs or FNMs should lead The Bahamas.

Third parties should understand what is at stake. If defeated badly at the general election, that third force will look like a joke never to be considered again.

McCartney is risking his political career.

Jun 11, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Branville McCartney - the self-appointed leader of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) credibility seems to erode the more he speaks

Branville McCartney's vanity party

By SIMON


FRONT PORCH

The press pass many journalists have generally given Branville McCartney is best understood with regard to the media’s perpetual hunt for ratings and sales, boredom and hunger for headlines, as well as its own ignorance of Bahamian history and often incurious nature.

But there is only so much of a pass the public can give the press in terms of the latter’s disregard for some of the basics of competent let alone good journalism. One story in particular from last week showcased the media’s laziness when it comes to providing the public with greater context.

In an interview for the NB 12 newscast, the self-appointed leader of the Democratic National Alliance claimed that his party started the same way as the PLP and FNM. Not only did the reporter fail to query such a bold claim during the interview, but there was also no post-interview fact-check of Mr. McCartney’s bogus claim.

There are various conclusions one may draw from Mr. McCartney’s bold and bogus claim. Either he was purposefully misleading the public or is stunningly ignorant of Bahamian political history — or both! Whatever the case, they all speak to the question of Mr. McCartney’s credibility, which seemingly erodes the more he speaks.

It may be the case that, stung by questions of the democratic pedigree of his DNA, Mr. McCartney is retroactively seeking to baptize his self-creation as legitimate in the eyes of voters.

TROUBLING

His response to the NB 12 reporter once again reveals troubling character traits of someone selling himself as a future prime minister. If Mr. McCartney knowingly was untruthful, this may suggest a cavalier approach to the truth and the facts, which he may not want to get in the way of the story he is trying to weave about himself as change agent and savior of The Bahamas.

If the man who has narcissistically and alternatively cast himself as Barack Obama, a young Lynden Pindling and a young Hubert Ingraham, simply got his history wrong, his comparisons with these leaders is laughable at best.

The self-portrait Mr. McCartney has painted of himself through his lacklustre contributions to debates in the House of Assembly, glib remarks generally and his maiden speech at the launch of his DNA is not a pretty one. They show him to be incurious and shallow both intellectually and in terms of basic history.

The other compelling problem for the man who purports to be a committed democrat is that he has already exhibited the tendencies of the maximum leader of a party being created in his own image and likeness.

One should always watch how things begin. Having launched his vanity party the way he has, one can only imagine how Mr. McCartney might react in the unlikely event he should gain real power. Instead of endless public relations exercises and stunts, Mr. McCartney might want to open and finish a history book, not to mention a basic civics class.

Queried about the genesis of the DNA, Mr. McCartney says that 13 people got together and made him leader. If one closes one’s eyes, one can almost imagine the scene in an upper room somewhere. With a little more imagination one might imagine a beam of light from the heavens, green of course, descending on Mr. McCartney as the chosen one.

NO WAY

The manner and circumstances in which the DNA was formed can in no way be compared with the manner and circumstances in which the PLP and the FNM were formed. Branville McCartney broke with the FNM with the principal motivation being that he wanted to be leader and prime minister.

Neither the PLP nor the FNM was a vanity party founded by someone who wanted to be a leader or prime minister, who then decided to create a vehicle to achieve that objective, as has been the case with the DNA and most of the so-called third parties that have come and gone over the years.

The PLP came into being following discussions among a number of persons who felt that the time had come for the introduction of party politics to the country as a means of expressing the collective will of the Bahamian people.

Two founders of the PLP, Cyril Stevenson and William Cartwright, travelled to the United Kingdom and Jamaica to consult with officials of political parties in those countries about the structure of modern political parties.

When the party was formed in 1953, Henry M. Taylor, who was then a member of the House of Assembly, was elected chairman by the founders and in 1954 Mr. Taylor and other officers were ratified by the convention. The PLP did not have a party leader until after the 1956 general election.

In that election Sir Henry lost his seat but stayed on as chairman. Lynden O. Pindling was among six PLP members elected in 1956 and he was at that time chosen to be leader. Later on, Sir Lynden for a while held both positions of chairman and leader.

In the case of the FNM, the Dissident Eight in 1970 expressed in a parliamentary vote their loss of confidence in the Leader of the PLP Sir Lynden. They were, however, reluctant to make a final break with the party to which all of them had given so much. In fact, at first they called themselves the Free PLP.

It was only after they were suspended from the PLP that they set about the task of bringing all the opposition forces together under the umbrella of a new entity — the FNM. That process took months and when it was finalized Sir Cecil Wallace Whitfield, who was recognized as leader of the Dissidents, was elected leader by the FNM’s Central Council and later by the Convention.

PANDERING

Mr. McCartney is shaping up to be a demagogue pandering to the fears, anxieties and frustrations of voters, more of which in a subsequent column. Demagogues are often the antithesis of the things for which they claim to be fighting. Despite having named his vanity party democratic, the democratic legitimacy and credibility of the DNA is dubious.

The PLP and the FNM emerged much differently than the DNA. They also successfully came to office, an outcome that is highly unlikely to be the case for Mr. McCartney’s vanity affair.
Mr. McCartney should be chary of those who are now boosting him out of temporary grievances, or long-term dubious theories about the great rise of independents and third parties. While there are increasingly nonaligned voters, the idea that they will help a strong third party emerge as a powerbroker is wearisome and has proved consistently wrong.

In that year’s general election, there was talk by some that 1997 would be the year of the independents. Not only was 1997 not the year of the independents, but that year the FNM got its largest popular vote ever.

There is a stark difference between educated analysis based on history, and wishful thinking as a substitute for analysis. Mr. McCartney would do well to quickly learn some basic historical facts, which are essential in proffering reasonable historical analysis.

frontporchguardian@gmail.com

bahamapundit.com

5/24/2011

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International